Contemporary Special Education Research: Syntheses of the Knowledge Base on Critical Instructional Issues

Chapter 9
Policy Decisions in Special
Education: The Role of
Meta-Analysis

Kenneth A. Kavale

The University of Iowa

Steven R. Forness

University of California, Los Angeles

Let's turn the clock back some 25 years; suppose that you have to decide
whether or not to include "psycholinguistic training" for students in the
recently designated special education classification of learning disabilities (LD). The elements of psycholinguistic training were formulated by Samuel A. Kirk, a prominent name in special education, were based on
the widely used Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities (ITPA), and
were targeted at the process deficits assumed associated with LD.
Although appearing to be a useful remedial technique, your decision
would probably require a more rational justification. Such justification
might be gleaned from the available evidence that could be scrutinized
to show "what the research says." The literature would reveal that the
ITPA has served as the clinical model for a variety of remedial and
developmental language programs. These programs are based on the
assumption that language is comprised of discrete components, and
these components can be improved with training. Suppose you acquired
a reasonable sample of research studies that investigated the effectiveness of psycholinguistic training. In all likelihood you would not be able
to make an unequivocal decision; the research evidence would be mixed
with some positive and some negative evaluations. Under such circumstances, the policy decision about whether or not to include psycholinguistic training in the remedial curriculum becomes complex and
difficult.

Print this page

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary
to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution.
We are sorry for any inconvenience.